IBMR vs. BPH
IBMR (iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF) and BPH (BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMR is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted 2029 Index, while BPH is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Precidian. IBMR is passively managed, while BPH is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. IBMR charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BPH.
Performance
IBMR vs. BPH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IBMR
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 0.13%
- 6M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 0.84%
- 1Y
- 2.90%
- 3Y*
- 3.21%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BPH
- 1D
- 4.41%
- 1M
- -3.74%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMR vs. BPH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
IBMR iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.72% |
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF | -3.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBMR and BPH is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2026 | -0.18 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IBMR vs. BPH — Risk / Return Rank
IBMR
BPH
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IBMR vs. BPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMR) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| IBMR | BPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.88 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.74 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBMR vs. BPH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBMR drawdown since its inception was -4.83%, smaller than the maximum BPH drawdown of -15.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMR and BPH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBMR | BPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.83% | -15.58% | +10.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.55% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.55% | -6.41% | +5.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.00% | -6.77% | +5.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.61% | — | — |
Volatility
IBMR vs. BPH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBMR | BPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.27% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.09% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.75% | 28.88% | -27.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.02% | 28.88% | -25.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.02% | 28.88% | -25.86% |
IBMR vs. BPH - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBMR has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BPH's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IBMR vs. BPH - Dividend Comparison
IBMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, more than BPH's 0.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF | 0.52% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBMR iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF | 2.54% | 2.55% | 2.53% | 1.27% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBMR and BPH have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBMR is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBMR is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for BPH.
IBMR has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 0.52% for BPH.
IBMR is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while BPH is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Precidian. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMR and 0.19% for BPH.
Find the right allocation for IBMR and BPH
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer